Friday, January 28, 2011
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
Sore Cervix Before Period
Using A Shaving Brush
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
Lab To Separate Plant Pigment
When painting, do we have the world or we split it further? When nature became the object of the gaze and represent them by images, are we somehow appropriate or we split from her womb? In one of the most alluring chapters splendid Autobiography lifeless, Felix de Azua advocates the second option: to transform it into images, signs and symbols, we definitely broken off nature, away from us forever: "The images were born (...) when humans felt the irresistible need to see out, so it became 'the view', orographic place where you can see. " And that gesture, which transformed the world in landscape, seen world- and later in world represented by the pictorial sign-exiling us instead of him.
Faustino Ruiz de la Peña (Oviedo, 1969) confiesa haber sentido justo lo contrario al rematar cada uno de los espléndidos paisajes que componen su primera individual en Gema Llamazares: la representación de los espacios agrestes o suburbiales, de los campos y jardines desiertos que excitaron por cualquier motivo su mirada en sus paseos por los alrededores de Oviedo o Gijón, al cruzar el páramo leonés en un jardín inglés o en unas salinas de Cabo de Gata, se ha convertido para él –confusamente, pero con un sentimiento inapelable- en un acto de apropiación de esos territorios; en una forma de conquista de parcelas del mundo a través de la pintura. O quizá, más bien, de reconquista.
Una reconquista en la que lo primero que has regained a certain attitude as a painter. By conviction and choice, Faustino Ruiz de la Peña is assumed contemporary artist and has served as such which is of special significance for the frankness with which he is now approaching the venerable landscape genre. Because, as Luis Feás earlier noted about some of these parts in them a striking change in approach from previous works of the author, "an example and model of the postmodern figuration, open and fragmented." Face painting this permanent state of self-awareness, listening to the mediation of the concept, language, references, Ruiz de la Peña looks now as if he had forgotten all that: with a dedication to the pleasure of execution delay and reconstructs the previous pleasure of contemplation and a sort of wise innocence that seems suspended in pure and direct action painting , all judgments about the ambiguous relationship between art and the world as if nature were painted, in effect, a means to possess it. As if what, however, was still possessed no consciousness of having broken away from her and just be painting pictures, and images images to infinity.
Welcome, Mr. Chips (2010). Oil, pigment and pencil on canvas. 147.5 x147, 5 cm.
Where, then, this reconciliation with a tradition of painting? Although melancholy and awe that cause us many of these tangled forests and these sites still under turbulent skies is very akin to that triggered a romantic landscape of race, I think the position of Faustino Ruiz de la Peña was not romantic in essence, has not tried to turn the landscape into a scenario in which the interior design of the artist metaphorically or in a repertoire of symbols that allow to speak in the language of the sublime, the orphanage's basic human respect the infinity of the world, an exile that was opened just as split from nature as a subject. You may not even have been elegiac.
guess here is, rather, an attempt to re-entry in nature, a healing reconciliation by painting these landscapes manifest above all humility, willingness to return to the outside world and desire for accuracy of landscape painter Renaissance or flamenco, an obedience to the order and patience in gathering scientific data almost, a mystical empiricism without stopping at every detail of the grounds, which seems to syllables carefully what is before their eyes with the same tenacity amazed who collects references for an atlas, an encyclopedia, a treaty that delights both the same things as the techniques to be recorded. Hence the way in which the delicacy of the drawing and the love for the minutiae of some of these landscapes can evoke, perhaps, the most empirical Friedrich-drawings, or the precise details that accumulate in every corner the views of the flamenco tradition. It is surely in the mime, in this faithful reproduction of natural forms in which Ruiz de la Peña may feel it has endorsed the territories previously wanted the eye, under a reciprocal agreement in which surrender to the object encourages the surrender of the object.
Cembranos (2009). Oil, pigment and pencil on canvas. 140x140 cm.
But it is true that, even though all these paintings exude something we identify as romantic (even if the viewer, not the author, who does in this case the inner dump). I suppose it happens, in part, because things, as they are, have in themselves a mystery. In part also because of the specific features of the landscape that aims to capture this painting (mostly booths and winter weeds, buildings, ruins and uninhabited, barren soil and others where the rot seems to thrive, gardens and suburban environments of who removed all human presence ...) But perhaps above all, depends on the funds, after all, I think they are the protagonists of these works: celajes turbulent fluid whose light wet and whose shyness about all forms contrasted mightily with the definition of natural or artificial objects on floating or that provide backlighting sharpening by defendants.
That fit between definition and undefined, form and content, accuracy and vagueness, there arises the mystery. There are, strictly speaking, two modes of painting in these landscapes. The very Faustino Ruiz de la Peña speaks of "the Craftsman" and "part of the painter." The first is additive, constructive dibujística, patient, and is based on accuracy, in the mastery of form and fidelity to them. The second is subtractive, and every requirement of the procedure calls quickly, delegates to the working of the pigment itself, assumes the risks necessary to finally do the wonder: what the painter calls "lights out." The melancholy and ominous light, as revealed in a second glance, turn out to be the most vivid of these landscapes. Perhaps what we most passionately wanted to catch. And somehow as specifically pictorial as mimesis ignored the outside world.
In fact, these funds will be encrypted continuity of this work compared to earlier stages of Ruiz de la Peña. The difference is that, as such stories thrown in cycles were a sort of limbo to which expelled small and fragmented narrative figures, has now been transformed into a figuration of heaven, and cast, without telling his own mysterious presence, is the world complex and complete parts of the world as we capture the eyes of a passer means, without further excuse or inciting sobresignificación your painting. But it happens that, for example in forested landscapes, the world has grown so much as to completely cover the sky with its plot, so it is hard not to think just as elusive in the world, beyond all painted image, in a mesh unable to capture that same light that makes it visible. Felix de Azua again: "We seek air, Seguin the forceful statement of Ecclesiastes, and as we paint it is unattainable to stay still. Frustration condemns us again and again to change either the representation or support. "
Is that so? In reality, no matter if it's frustration with the elusiveness of the world which encourages artists to try new wiles, no matter, equally, if possession of the landscape across the landscape, as he says feel Faustino Ruiz de la Peña, is ineffective or illusory. What counts in the end, whether or not the conquest of reality by painting, is, unquestionably, the more reality is based paint, you add more landscape to landscape the world over the world. And there are landscapes added that world we all want, one way or another, have, to do ours forever. As is the case.
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
Can You Stay On Cipralex Long Term
Monday, January 3, 2011
East Brunswick Nj Basketball Indoor
Sunday, January 2, 2011
What Are The Different Plates In Ontario
Why Do My Cat Bites The Blanket
J-14: What would you say was the most difficult scene in the movie?
J-14: How was working with a green screen and all the characters were not really there? was so difficult?
J-14: Do you remember any embarrassing moment that was on the set?